Pakistan, what's going on? At first, it seemed as if leaving the Pakistanis in the dark about the raid on bin Laden in the outskirts of Islamabad was a bad idea: apparently the Pakistanis wished to aid in the raid and help oversee the efforts to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties. However, weeks after the raid that killed the al-Qaeda kingpin, it seems like a wise decision taken by the Americans.
In his mansion-bunker, Osama bin Laden had no plan for evacuation--he made no attempt to escape the raid. Moreover, the documents and media that the SEALs collected were not hidden away in some safe; rather, they were out in the open. Moreover, the man had hundreds of thousands of dollars stashed in that very building. It seemed as if either he was very comfortable, or as if he wanted to be "captured" and killed, a choice that seems more likely as, considering he was the most wanted man alive, it is no surprise that safety would have otherwise been the first thing on his mind.
But despite this development that suggests that bin Laden had support for the State, it seems very likely that this support - that is if he had support, at all - was not the state. Earlier today (May 13, 2011), two consecutive suicide bombers attacked a small town outside of Peshawar, killing - among 80 others - a group of recently graduated Pakistani cadets. This sends a clear message: Taliban, who is claimed to be behind this instance, seeks revenge on the Pakistani military.
Why? Well, there are actually two, contrasting answers: (1) Taliban is angry that the Pakistanis "killed" Osama, and want to take revenge on the Americans through "innocent Pakistanis" or (2) this is a way the Taliban is "punishing" the Pakistanis for not "following orders," for not defending Osama.
Thus, we arrive at an empass. Was it a good choice for the Americans to leave the Pakistanis in the dark? To answer this question, the dilemma above must be answered first; however, both choices assume that the Taliban "liked" Osama. Though this may seem counter-obvious, why should they? What if the Taliban don't love the al-Qaeda leader, after all its not like he was its leader, right? What if Taliban had wanted bin Laden killed - remember his sons are at large - and set their ally up? After all, we're still in the Middle East and we're still fighting terror, right? In fact, it could be argued that Osama was not a key asset to the entire Muslim Fundamentalist Machine, considering he brought attention upon an otherwise covert operation.
Yet, many people may brush this off, calling it a conspiracy theory. If you decide to take this rout, then what is the answer to the above dilemma? Had they launched an attack on the Pakistani soldiers to punish the Pakistani Government for not holding their end of the deal or did they do that to send a message to American (in which case it is important to note that, if this were really the Taliban, it has no conscience)? Or maybe, it was just another attack. Maybe the Taliban are just back to work after their Father died? Whatever the case may be, at the end of the day, there are 80-some dead Pakistanis in the border-town of Shabqadar. The real tragedy and living proof that these Fundamentalists are not just killers of "infidels" but also killers of Muslims. In a sense, considering the amount of innocent lives the American operations in this region has cost, they are almost a less-stable, wrong-side-of-the-propaganda counterpart.
But despite this development that suggests that bin Laden had support for the State, it seems very likely that this support - that is if he had support, at all - was not the state. Earlier today (May 13, 2011), two consecutive suicide bombers attacked a small town outside of Peshawar, killing - among 80 others - a group of recently graduated Pakistani cadets. This sends a clear message: Taliban, who is claimed to be behind this instance, seeks revenge on the Pakistani military.
Why? Well, there are actually two, contrasting answers: (1) Taliban is angry that the Pakistanis "killed" Osama, and want to take revenge on the Americans through "innocent Pakistanis" or (2) this is a way the Taliban is "punishing" the Pakistanis for not "following orders," for not defending Osama.
Thus, we arrive at an empass. Was it a good choice for the Americans to leave the Pakistanis in the dark? To answer this question, the dilemma above must be answered first; however, both choices assume that the Taliban "liked" Osama. Though this may seem counter-obvious, why should they? What if the Taliban don't love the al-Qaeda leader, after all its not like he was its leader, right? What if Taliban had wanted bin Laden killed - remember his sons are at large - and set their ally up? After all, we're still in the Middle East and we're still fighting terror, right? In fact, it could be argued that Osama was not a key asset to the entire Muslim Fundamentalist Machine, considering he brought attention upon an otherwise covert operation.
Yet, many people may brush this off, calling it a conspiracy theory. If you decide to take this rout, then what is the answer to the above dilemma? Had they launched an attack on the Pakistani soldiers to punish the Pakistani Government for not holding their end of the deal or did they do that to send a message to American (in which case it is important to note that, if this were really the Taliban, it has no conscience)? Or maybe, it was just another attack. Maybe the Taliban are just back to work after their Father died? Whatever the case may be, at the end of the day, there are 80-some dead Pakistanis in the border-town of Shabqadar. The real tragedy and living proof that these Fundamentalists are not just killers of "infidels" but also killers of Muslims. In a sense, considering the amount of innocent lives the American operations in this region has cost, they are almost a less-stable, wrong-side-of-the-propaganda counterpart.
When Osama bin Laden's Pakistani supporters strike back, this is what it looks like: twisted metal, scattered suitcases and body parts; blood and savagery.
The Taliban said the vicious double suicide bombing in Shabqadar, a trading town on the edge of the tribal belt in Charsadda district in north-western Pakistan, claimed the first part of the blood price they had promised to extract for the American killing of Bin Laden on 2 May. It was conducted with ruthless efficiency.
Abid Khan, 24, cowered in his sweetshop when he heard the first blast and then, eight minutes later, a second. Rushing to the scene, he found some 200 trainee soldiers strewn on the road among mangled vans and a pile of bags. More>
No comments:
Post a Comment